What Students Say They KNOW, FEEL, and DO

About Cyber-Plagiarism and Academic Dishonesty?

A Case Study

Zorana Ercegovac
Henry Samueli School of Engineering and Applied Sciences 4731H Boelter
Hall, University of California, Los Angeles, 405 Hilgard Ave., Los Angeles, CA
90095 (310) 869-2770; (310) 825-2273(fax). zercegov@ucla.edu

This article presents results of a case study that used self-reported paper-and-
pencil questionnaire by thirty-seven junior high school students with regard to
their understanding of, attitudes, and behaviors toward plagiarism in the Web
environment. Performance indicators used in the questionnaire were framed in
the context of information literacy standards. The article identifies those areas
that intervention programs should be designed on the basis of students' gaps
and levels of understanding with respect to responsible uses of information in
general, and especially of digital networked resources.

Introduction

This article reports part one of a three-prong project that has designed pretest
instruments and a sequenced intervention program, the impact of which will be
reported elsewhere. Thirty-seven junior high school students were examined with regard
to their understanding, attitudes, and behaviors toward cyber-plagiarism. Prong A
explored students' normative understanding of specific issues surrounding plagiarism in
the Web environment, the values they place on ethical uses of copyrighted digital
resources, and their practices in their own work. The reviewed literature (Ercegovac &
Richardson, 2004) and this author's own experience with secondary- and college-level
students have demonstrated that they often distinguish among content knowledge,
moral values and moral behavior toward different forms of academic dishonesty. For
example, a student may give a correct definition of plagiarism, yet fail to correctly apply
it on exams and projects. Prong B has piloted intervention programs that are sensitive
to different levels of learners' moral reasoning to ensure their understanding of one of
the core values in education as a whole, that of academic honesty. Prong C will use
both formative and summative assessment instruments in order to measure the impact
of interventions on students' behaviors and learning outcomes.

Related Work

Reports on information seeking and search process, search effectiveness, and

children's relevance criteria of digital contents have included elementary school
children (Borgman, et al., 1995; Hirsh, 1999; Kafai & Bates, 1997; Marchionini, 1989;
Schacter, Chung & Dorr, 1998; Wallace & Kupperman, 1997), middle-school (Bilal,
2000; Bilal, 1999; Eastman & Agostino, 1986; Small & Ferreira, 1994), and high-school
students (Fidel, 1999; Edyburn, 1988). The researchers asked important questions and
used different information technologies ranging from digital resources on the Web to
online library catalogs, electronic encyclopedias, and magazine databases.

The Nine Information Literacy Standards for Student Learningorganizes nine IL

standards under three headings: Information Literacy, Independent Learning, and
Social Responsibility (AASL, 1998). When applied through inquiry-based learning, the
standards should help learners access, evaluate, and use information effectively in their
own work. This would include students' ability to find and evaluate various resources, to
formulate theses and ask good questions, and to understand the value of trustworthy
information. These IL skills are applicable across projects, tests, and in lifelong learning,
beyond schools and colleges. The studies concern themselves mainly with the first
group of IL standards, which helps one to understand the information search process in
order to access and evaluate a variety of information resources.

This article addresses those issues that fall under the third group of IL standards, that
of Social Responsibility. It considers students' understanding, values, and behaviors
toward responsible use of informationafter they have accessed variety of resources and
evaluated them for potential relevance with respect to their information needs.
Indicators #2 (students respect intellectual property rights) and #3 (students use
information technology responsibly) per Standard 8 have been especially useful to us,
as well as indicator #2 (respects others' ideas and backgrounds and acknowledges
their contributions) in Standard 9. AASL performance indicators on ethical uses of
information resources and technology parallel those indicators that were established
for Higher Education (ACRL, 2000). However, children mature unevenly and some of the
social responsibility performance indicators across IL standards may vary with regard to
age, gender, school environment, level of skills, and moral reasoning (Kohlberg, 1976;
Kuhlthau, 1987).

To bring the two sets of IL standards closer together, we are developing a suite of
sequenced instructional units and assessments across IL standards. The starting point
was to develop a palette of assessment instruments in the area of responsible uses of
digital information resources. The instruments are designed as scalable, modular, and
customizable, so that instructors could adapt them according to learners' needs.

The word cyber-plagiarism is taken to mean copying text, images, music, film and
pasting into one's own work without proper acknowledgement. Under broader headings
of cheating or academic dishonesty, plagiarism refers to cheating on assignments,
projects, lab reports, and exams by means of using other persons' ideas and words as
their own without giving proper credit.

Motivation

Ercegovac and Richardson's review (2004) has demonstrated that 75 percent of 4,500
self-reported surveyed high school students had cheated at least once on a test, up
from 50 percent in 1993. More than fifty percent had stolen sentences and paragraphs
from the Internet. This study's pilot pretests assessed students' and teachers'
conceptual and procedural knowledge of plagiarism related issues. Both groups have
demonstrated numerous problems in the areas of citing Web sources, understanding
digital primary documents, and paraphrasing. Conceptual knowledge refers to the
ability to define plagiarism, explain reasons for giving credit, and recognize if a given
text has been plagiarized. Procedural knowledge refers to the ability to cite a source
obtained on the Web.

Due to the widespread "cut and paste" practice of copyrighted digital resources on the
Web, it is important to address the notion of plagiarism in the Web context now that it
has extended beyond schools and colleges into mainstream society. Student
understandingof cyber-plagiarism, valuesthey place on uses of copyrighted digital
resources, and related behaviorsvary widely.

In order to design sequenced student-centered instructional units on understanding

ethical uses of information and information technology, training programs must be
based on learners' capacities, gaps and needs. Thus, our first task was to develop
assessment indicators for the constructs mentioned in the two sets of standards.

While there is some progress made on assessment measures of IL in general, we found

little evidence with regard to student knowledge of, values, and practices in the ethical
uses of copyrighted digital resources. The notion of plagiarism has been traditionally
addressed with a one-size-fits-all teaching regarding ethical uses of Web sources that
invariably include dictionary definitions, bibliographic templates, and subsequent
punishments if students are found guilty of plagiarism and fabrication in their reports.
Unfortunately, this type of pedagogical model has not produced desirable outcomes
across the educational ladder. Clearly, innovative student-centered intervention models
on ethical uses of digital assets need to be developed, tested, and partnered with
librarians and the faculty.

Colleges have been concerned with plagiarism issues and have started to publish
tutorials and quizzes on their library portals. In an interview with three candidates for
2005 IEEE president-elect, a top professional engineering society, the candidates were
asked to comment on their views toward plagiarism. Asked "What action do you think
is appropriate to take against an IEEE member found to have plagiarized another's
work?", one of the respondents noted that the important mission is to educate people
that plagiarism is not acceptable and that it is against the code of engineering ethics
(Kowalenko, 2004).
Nearly every form of expression is nowadays available on paper and in multiple digital
equivalents. While many educational institutions have become wired, literature
suggests that people are unclear as to what digital objects are, how to manage them
properly, prevent plagiarism, and train the new generation of citizens who will continue
to access, manage, and use digital assets throughout their lives. We need innovative
models that would engage students, librarians,and facultyat different levels of learning
in understanding why plagiarism is immoral. We believe that if secondary school
students are given proper interventions during their formative stages of moral
development, they will have sufficient capacity to build upon at subsequent learning
levels.

Objectives and Research Design

The main objectives of this exploratory study are to:

G1: Demonstrate the extent of difficulties high school students have in their
understanding of, values they place on plagiarism in the context of Web resources, and
relative behaviors (what students say they know, what their attitudes are toward
plagiarism, and what they do).

G2: Develop indicators that measure content knowledge, values toward and students'
behaviors of cyber-plagiarism.

The Context

This study was a part of a new school-wide initiative under History Department and the
Library. The purpose has been to prepare junior high school students for writing
research papers on self-selected topics in American History in the 50s and 60s. We
wanted from the outset of the project to instill in students a sense of self-respect, to use
resources responsibly, and to adhere to high academic ethical standards.

The process was conceptualized as a three-part program. After a sequence of three 55-
minute instructional units, students were divided into two groups, each visiting a major
local college library for a full day field trip. Students prepared ahead of their off-campus
visit and researched their topics using a variety of resources such as books, online
databases and encyclopedias. The third part consisted of an additional three 55-minute
units.

Subjects and the Testing Environment

Non-AP American History high school juniors were asked to respond to a self-
administered eight-page paper-and-pencil pretest questionnaire. A sample of
availability of thirty-seven eleventh grade students was considered adequate in this
exploratory study. Twenty-one male and sixteen female students were all from an
independent 7-12 co-educational school in Los Angeles. There were three sessions with
two history teachers. We have no reason to suspect that the students were self-selected
by aptitude, gender, friends, particular teacher, or time of the day. All scheduling is
done independently of students' preferences; it is dependent on classroom space alone.

The pretest took about 15 minutes to complete. The investigator as well as history
teachers in respective classes were present during the test. Students were told briefly
about the purpose of the test, they were assured that responses will not influence their
grades, and that in many instances there are no right or wrong answers. All students
were unidentified for confidentiality reasons.

The Pretest Instrument

A draft of the questionnaire was pre-tested with teachers and high school sophomores
in Fall of 2003. It was subsequently revised on wording and ordering of questions
asked. The pretest was designed to solicit student responses with respect to their
content knowledge of cyber-plagiarism, their attitudes, and behaviors in the area of
cyber-plagiarism related issues.
Part (a) developed assessment indicators to capture students' content knowledgeof
cyber-plagiarism related concepts. Students were asked to circle the best definition
among several definitions of plagiarism, and to recognize a correct citation format for a
book, a magazine article, a Web site. A separate question asked students to identify the
part of web citation that books do not have. Other questions pertained to practice of
citing, recognizing if a portion of text has been plagiarized, and if the students' exhibited
preference to cite printed over electronic resources. Students were asked to indicate on
a five-point scale specific instances in which they would cite Web based material (e.g., if
they copied exactly an entire paragraph, a sentence, quoted text, or paraphrased).
Students were asked about their practices in citing printed and electronic equivalents; if
they understood the concept of various authorial responsibilities that participate in
intellectual or artistic functions. For example, would they cite a choreographer whose
dance is put on DVD, map-maker, speechwriter, and film producer. Students were also
asked to mark examples of plagiarism (or not) for the following activities: copying
computer code off the Web and submitting as own; for transferring email information
or ideas into their own work without attribution; for scanning images and making a DVD
album for sale; for digitizing someone's cartoons and sharing them on the Web under
their name. Students were also asked if they were given points for submitting
bibliographies along with their work, and about their awareness of honor code in their
schools.

Part (b) used indicators to measure students' attitudestoward plagiarism. Students

were asked to compare plagiarizing with activities such as stealing and cheating. Again,
as in the section on content knowledge, students were asked to state what they
considered "immoral" toward various non-book materials. Examples included burning
CDs for commercial profit, mixing songs into a new album and distributing to friends,
rendering photos and making a new album without attribution, and downloading
images for classroom (educational) purpose. Other indicators to gauge student values
toward cyber-plagiarism were measured in terms of how students ranked order various
behaviors on levels of seriousness on a five-point scale (Niels, 2002).

Part (c) used indicators to gauge students' actionstoward academic honesty in general,
plagiarism included. Examples of students' behavior was measured in terms of their
self-reported answers to questions, if they have ever cheated on tests, projects, lab
reports, if they gave or received help, and the extent of such behavior. They were asked
to give reasons for cheating (e.g., competition, fears of failing, parents' expectations,
teachers are soft, everyone cheats, won't be caught). Other questions asked if they
would recycle and/or purchased papers from paper mills and other sources.

Findings

Content Knowledge-What Students Say They Know?

The first part of the survey gauged students' level of content knowledge with regard to
cyber-plagiarism. Among interesting findings was the extent of difficulties students had
with regard to giving attribution to creators of non-book resources; examples are
photographers, choreographers, and cartoon artists. In particular, the extent of
students' difficulties is demonstrated in their answers to a multi-part question with
regard to the concept of authorship:

1. Forty percent of students would fail to cite an artist who choreographed dances
for a ballet Romeo and Juliette.
2. About 30 percent students (n=11) think that maps are not worth crediting.
3. Scanning images and making a DVD album for sale is considered plagiarism by
sixteen percent of students.
4. None of the students thought that plagiarism is digitizing someone's cartoons
and sharing them on the Web under own name.
5. None of the students thought that copying computer code off the Web and
submitting as own would constitute plagiarism.
6. Only twenty-one percent of students regard plagiarism when transferring email
information to own work without giving credit to email transcripts (senders'
name, time stamp).
7. Only six students thought that failing to cite interviews would be considered
plagiarism. Majority (81 percent) would not attribute ideas received from
personal communication.

Students had problems understanding digital objects, especially primary digital

resources. While all except one student agreed that personal letters were primary
sources, only 29 percent considered digital photos as primary sources, 42 percent said
that Alexander Hamilton's shoes were primary sources, and 45 percent considered their
family's records as primary sources. About two thirds of the students under study were
not sure about the concept of fair use; in this regard, one of the questions asked
students if we had right to include a digitized photo from the Library of Congress
collection of prints and photographs on the survey. Thirty-five percent (n=14) said that
"we had right to include an image on the survey."

Nearly half of the students (49%) under study would give credit only "to avoid
punishment". Others cite sources to "support evidence that you use in your report," and
to "help your reader find a resource that you used in your report."

Furthermore, students would credit sources if they quoted portions of text (83%) or
copied exactly from a source (43%). With regard to Web resources, only fifty-six percent
of the students "strongly agree" and "agree" that they would cite sources if the text was
quoted. Forty-five percent of the students would credit Web sites that provided ideas in
their work. In general, only sixteen percent of the students (n=6) thought that
paraphrasing or summarizing another's work without attribution would be considered
plagiarism; eighty-one percent are all right to paraphrase without attribution. Eighty-one
percent of students would not cite a source for ideas not commonly known. Misquoting
someone else's work is considered plagiarism by eighteen percent of the students.
None of the students think that using someone else's work as own would be considered
cheating.

Specifically, students were asked to match two citation formats with a Web site, a
book, a magazine article, and an encyclopedia article. The magazine article as a
citation pattern was recognized by 11 of 37 students (29%), and six students (16%)
could not match the correct citation with a book.

Students' Attitudes toward Plagiarism

The second part of the pretest attempted to gauge students' attitudes toward
plagiarism related issues. Seventy-three percent of the students (n=27) feel it is
"immoral" to use the same logo or trade mark (like in nike shoes, coca cola) and
present as their work. Fewer students (37%) feel that it is immoral to render a stuffed
animal and display locally under their name. Nearly all (35 of 37) students think that it
is all right to use a particular design (cereal box, Campbell soup design, etc.) as a basis
for their work and acknowledge the original artist's name.

Students were asked to respond about their attitudes toward various non-textual digital
art products such as music, images, and photos. Specifically, students feel that it is
immoral to:

1. Burn CDs for commercial profit (eighty-six percent (n=32) of the students think it
is wrong).
2. Reproduce an image and publicly display under their name (fifty-one percent
(n=19) think it is immoral).
3. Burn CDs even for your own use (only four students think that it is not all right).
4. Mix songs into a new album for non-commercial purposes (distribution to
friends). Six students regard this as immoral.
5. Modify an existing album and resell to friends. Over two thirds of students (n=25,
67%) consider it immoral.
6. Download images for educational purpose (fair use). Only three students
consider it immoral.
7. Render photos and make a new album without attribution. Fifty-eight (58%)
students think that it would be wrong.

Finally, students were asked to rank level of seriousness of various forms of academic
cheating on a scale of five (very serious) to one (not at all serious). Students' responses
show an overall confusion of what constitutes academic honesty. Is copying an answer
left by mistake on the board considered a dishonest act? By looking at the spread of
answers to most questions (e.g., 1, 5-9, 11-14), there is a definite need to instill a solid
sense of what constitutes a moral behavior, a feeling of thrust and respect toward self
and others. For comparison purposes, the list was given separately to a group of
teachers as well as to parents. Disagreement between the groups and among the
members within each group tells us that teachers, students, and parents need guidance
in the matter academic dishonesty should be interpreted and treated.

What Students Do?

Finally, the survey explored students' practice in the area of academic honesty in
general. Students were asked the following questions: "Have you ever given help on
tests, exams, projects, lab reports to your friends?" and "Have you ever received help
from others on tests, exams, projects, lab reports?" Only 7 and 8 students respectively
have never given or received help while on tests, exams, projects, and lab reports from
their friends. Thirty-one students (80%) helped on tests, and thirty students (78%)
received help at some point. We have not asked how often and when they gave or
received help. This is in large contrast with their own attitudes toward the types of
behaviors previously ranked "very serious" by the same group of students. It
demonstrates our earlier remark that students' content knowledge, their attitudes, and
behaviors vary widely. Fears of failing followed by parents' high expectations were the
two reasons students give as reasons for their plagiarized work.

Conclusions and Further Work

This study explored extent of students' content knowledge, their attitudes, and general
practices toward cyber-plagiarism and academic [dis]honesty. A sample of availability
consisted of thirty-seven junior high school students from an independent school during
Spring of 2004. We designed and pre-tested paper-and-pencil assessment instrument
both with students and teachers on wording and sequencing of questions. This study's
results have demonstrated that numerous concepts in the area of Social Responsibility
are confusing in the minds of high school junior students under study. The following
core recommendations are based on this study's students' responses to questions
related to content knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors with regard to cyber-plagiarism:

1. Teach teachers, (e.g., in-service, pre-service, mentoring) to deal with cheating

situations. This should be a part of the school mission and in collaboration with
 media specialists, administrators and care givers. In addition, teachers
themselves may not know how to cite digital resources; they also appear to be
inconsistent in requiring students to write bibliographies. The implication here is
that more training is needed for both teachers and students (and parents) in the
area of Social Responsibility skills. Thus, librarians have an untapped opportunity
to collaborate with faculty in offering their expertise on conceptual and
procedural aspects of responsible uses of all kinds of resources, born digital and
digitized. Creative methods should be developed to teach students about
catalogs and how these compare with magazine databases, search engines,
digital libraries, and archives.

2. Teach students at different levels of their understanding the notion of intellectual

propertyboth conceptually (what it consists of, why it exists, how to decide when
to credit others' ideas) and procedurally (how to write a bibliography). It seems as
if the students are trained to make judgment mechanically, based on whether or
not a text is put between a pair of quotation marks. If quoted, it gets cited by the
majority of students for some formats and media. Since images, music,
cartoons, and other artistic products are generally not quoted, they don't get
attribution. Teach students to distinguish between intellectual property and trade
marks when they use in their work. There might be a general confusion between
what is permissible for the purposes of classroom practice in contrast to what is
ethical when students' art is displayed publicly under their names.

3. Authors matter. While the procedural instruction has been included in IL units
with a variety of templates and case studies, conceptually, this is the problem of
authorship. As such, it may be a more difficult concept to teach especially
secondary school students, middle school, in particular. However, in a long run,
teaching this concept early on might be a more powerful way to organize many IL
skills.

4. Content matters. One of the lessons we need to convey in IL units is that

students give credit to borrowed materials regardless of format (book, map,
sound recording, serial), medium (print, digital, networked), intellectual
(writings), or type of artistic creation (graphic, moving picture, audio,
 choreography). Plagiarism applies equally well to text, image, video, quilt, music,
any intellectual or artistic endeavor. Understanding the concepts of authorship
and content should be weaved throughout IL skills.

5. Instill the sense of cultural heritage in primary sources, digitized or born digital,
focusing on "objects" rather than particular examples of primary sources (e.g.,
diaries, postcards, costume, armory, decorative and other museum and archival
artifacts). There is a need to explain the nature of digital objects in general, and
specifically digital primary sources to students of all ages. It is important to do
this now because thousands of digital historical documents, archival and
museum artifacts, scientific data, visualization, and models are increasingly
being available to anyone who has access to digital collections (e.g., The
American Memory; Digital Library for Earth System Education (DLESE); National
Science, Mathematics, Engineering, and Technology Education Digital Library
(NSDL)). Internet is students' source of choice, so they will continue to use wealth
of information in their reports from these and other digital libraries, and we have
a responsibility to explain ethical uses of digital objects at appropriate levels of
their moral understanding. From students' own responses, it appears that they
would cite printed over Web sources.

6. Teach students to correctly paraphraseand give credit to ideas and sources they
use in their own work. When a group of seventh grade children were recently
surveyed on their practice of citing Web resources, 73 percent (n=57) said they
would credit information or ideas obtained from Internet if they quoted sources;
only 28 percent (n=22) would credit sources if they paraphrased.

7. Develop a variety of age appropriate and inquiry-based moral scenariosthat

students can begin to understand why plagiarism is morally wrong.

8. Teach students to respect themselves by being honest not for "fears of failing"
and because of "parents' high expectations."

9. Teach the teachers to consistently require students to write bibliographies in

reports, presentations and projects.
We expect that this study's contribution will raise awareness about the nature of digital
networked resources in the way these can be properly managed and responsibly used
throughout lifelong learning at all educational levels. As we make transition from
predominantly textual materials to multimedia, fundamental products of intellectual or
artistic endeavor, and intellectual property rights need to be taught at appropriate
levels of students' moral reasoning.

We believe that this study will have a major impact on how librarians will train learners
in responsible uses of digital networked resources. The contribution is of theoretical and
practical values and may be applicable in the broad educational and policy-making
aspects.

Further Work and Concluding Remarks

Based on the findings from this study, we have piloted intervention programs for upper
grade high school students. The procedure will be adjusted and replicated with middle
school students. The result will have a unified structure that introduces students at their
"native" stages of development to the ethical uses of digital resources. Post-tests are
being developed to assess the effect interventions will have on content knowledge,
attitudes students have toward cyber-plagiarism issues as demonstrated in their
learning outcomes, and related behaviors.

Further studies will be designed to show that there is a positive correlation between
students' content knowledge and their attitudes and behaviors toward cyber-plagiarism.
The ultimate goal is to produce graduates who will reduce cheating and plagiarizing.
We will know that we have accomplished this goal when deans for students' behavior
no longer report embarrassing cases of cheating, when we no longer have to "punish"
students for their unacceptable actions, and when there is a culture in place that
respects learning itself rather than learning for an A plus outcomes. Until then, we need
to keep working on designing student-centered instructional units, ensuring that
instructors are well prepared, and that campuses are dedicated to ethical graduates.
References
American Association of School Librarians (AASL). (1998). Information Power:
Building partnerships for learning. Prepared by AASL [and] Association for
Educational Communications and Technology. Chicago: The Association.

Association of College &research Libraries. (2000). Information literacy competency

standards for higher education. Chicago: C&RL.

Bilal, B. (2000). Children's use of the Yahooligans! Web search engine: I. Cognitive,
physical, and affective behaviors on fact-based search tasks. Journal of the
American Society for Information Science, 51, 646-65.

Bilal D. (1999). Web search engines for children: A comparative study and
performance evaluation of Yahooligans!, AskJeeves for Kids, and Super Snooper. In
Larry Woods (Ed.), Proceedings of the Sixty-Second ASIS Annual Meeting, October
31-November 4 (pp. 70-83). Medford: Information Today.

Borgman, C.L., Hirsh, S.G., Walter, V. &Gallagher, A.G. (1995). Children's searching
behavior on browsing and keyword online catalogs: The science library catalog
project. , 663-84.

Eastman S.T. &Agostino, D.E. (1986). Commanding the computer: Functions and
concepts of videotex technology for eighth-grade students. Journal of Research and
Development in Education, 19, 49-57.

Edyburn, D.L. (1988). Examining the successful retrieval of information by students

using online databases. School Library Media Quarterly, 16, 256-59.

Ercegovac, Z. &Richardson, J.V. (2004). Academic dishonesty, plagiarism included,

in the digital age: A literature review. College &Research Libraries, 65, 301-18.

Fidel, R. et al. (1999). A visit to the information mall: Web searching behavior of high
school students. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 50, 24-37.

Hirsh, S.G. (1999). Children's relevance criteria and information seeking on

electronic resources. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 50,
1265-83.
Kafai, Y. &Bates, M.J. (1997). Internet web-searching instruction in the elementary
classroom: Building a foundation for information literacy. School Library Media
Quarterly, 25, 103-11.

Kohlberg, L. (1976). Moral stages and moralization: The cognitive-developmental

approach. In T. Lickona (Ed.), Moral development and behavior: Theory, research,
and social issues. New York: Holt, Rinehart &Winston.

Kowalenko, K. (2004). From outsourcing to plagiarism. IEEE Institute, 28, 8-9.

Kuhlthau, C.C. (1987). Information seeking, In J. Varlejs (Ed.), Proceedings of the

Twenty-fourth Annual Symposium of the Graduate Alumni and Faculty of the Rutgers
School of Communication, Information and Library Studies(pp. 40 - 51) Jefferson,
NC: McFarland.

Large, A., Beheshti, J. &Rahman, T. (2000). Design criteria for children's web
portals: The users speak out. Journal of the American Society for Information
Science, 53, 79-94.

Marchionini, G. (1989). Information-seeking strategies of novices using a full-text

electronic encyclopedia. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 40,
54-66.

Niels, G.J. (2002). Academic practices, school culture and cheating behavior.
Student Development, 43, 374-85.

Schacter, J., Chung, G. K.W.K., &Dorr, A. (1998). Children's internet searching on

complex problems: Performance and process analyses. Journal of the American
Society for Information Science, 49, 840-49.

Small, R.V. &Ferreira, S.M. (1994). Multimedia technology and the changing nature
of research in the school library. Reference Librarian, 44, 95-106.

Wallace, R. &Kupperman, J. (1997). On-line search in the science classroom:

Benefits and possibilities. Paper presented at the AERA, Chicago.